I try to avoid soy from getting anywhere in my diet for other reasons than estrogen, just do some research on soy

03-29-2009, 03:10 PM

purebred

Guest

posted this in another thread but concerning flax seeds:

is the effect significant or negligible? i was under the impression soy were a health food!

i tend to drink soy milk (non-GMO) as I'm allergic to cow milk. I've read non-GMO provides a wide spectrum of benefits as well. this is why i haven't dropped soy from my regimen despite the nay-say. however, i balance my food intake (i.e. i have great variety in my diet. soy is not my only protein source).

should i avoid all types of soy or just some? i was told soy beans dont have an inpact on estrogen.

They don't. Look at my post on the positives of soy protein. Way better than meat based protein. Again in my post.

03-30-2009, 08:53 PM

purebred

Guest

Originally Posted by djbombsquad

They don't. Look at my post on the positives of soy protein. Way better than meat based protein. Again in my post.

from a logical, balanced standpoint: i don't think one is superior to the other. one would probably achieve better results implementing a diet full of variety.

this is, of course, a perspective which doesn't take into consideration what science tells us but then again, I don't know what the science tells us. i know what my taste buds tell me. they tell me they want variety to prevent getting bored. plus it's easier to meat your protein requirements and grow when you ingest meat. look back in history with the Romans and the Germans and the size difference between the two.

the Romans averaged about what? 5'4" on a good day?
the Germans averaged about 6 feet?

one of the major differences in culture was their dietary habits. the Germans had a diet largely consisting of meat. protein makes you grow, taller (when you're at that age), stronger and bigger (when you're lifting heavy weights).

from a logical, balanced standpoint: i don't think one is superior to the other. one would probably achieve better results implementing a diet full of variety.

this is, of course, a perspective which doesn't take into consideration what science tells us but then again, I don't know what the science tells us. i know what my taste buds tell me. they tell me they want variety to prevent getting bored. plus it's easier to meat your protein requirements and grow when you ingest meat. look back in history with the Romans and the Germans and the size difference between the two.

the Romans averaged about what? 5'4" on a good day?
the Germans averaged about 6 feet?

one of the major differences in culture was their dietary habits. the Germans had a diet largely consisting of meat. protein makes you grow, taller (when you're at that age), stronger and bigger (when you're lifting heavy weights).

it's a no-brainer to me!

And there life span was not the greatest. Look back here. They consumed whole grains, soy etc plant based diet.

Chapter 5 of Genesis tells of the long lives of people in the generations of the vegetables, whole grains, non meat period from Adam to Noah. Adam lived 930 years; Seth (Adam's son) lived 912 years; Enosh (Seth's son) lived 905 years; Kenan (Enosh's son) lived 910 years; and so on, until Methuselah, who lived 969 years, the longest time of life recorded in the Torah. After the flood, people lived for much shorter periods. Abraham, for example, lived only 175 years. This was after they started eating flesh.

Why the tremendous change in life spans? Before the flood, people were forbidden to eat meat; after the flood it was permitted (Gen. 9:3). A partial explanation, therefore, may be that it was the change in diet that contributed to the change in life spans. This view was held by the Jewish philosopher and Bible commentator Maimonides. [7] Recent evidence linking heavy meat consumption with several diseases reinforces this point of view. Of course, a shift to sensible vegetarian diets will not increase life spans to anywhere near those of early people, but recent medical evidence indicates that it would lead to an increase in the average span and quality of life.

And there life span was not the greatest. Look back here. They consumed whole grains, soy etc plant based diet.

Chapter 5 of Genesis tells of the long lives of people in the generations of the vegetables, whole grains, non meat period from Adam to Noah. Adam lived 930 years; Seth (Adam's son) lived 912 years; Enosh (Seth's son) lived 905 years; Kenan (Enosh's son) lived 910 years; and so on, until Methuselah, who lived 969 years, the longest time of life recorded in the Torah. After the flood, people lived for much shorter periods. Abraham, for example, lived only 175 years. This was after they started eating flesh.

Why the tremendous change in life spans? Before the flood, people were forbidden to eat meat; after the flood it was permitted (Gen. 9:3). A partial explanation, therefore, may be that it was the change in diet that contributed to the change in life spans. This view was held by the Jewish philosopher and Bible commentator Maimonides. [7] Recent evidence linking heavy meat consumption with several diseases reinforces this point of view. Of course, a shift to sensible vegetarian diets will not increase life spans to anywhere near those of early people, but recent medical evidence indicates that it would lead to an increase in the average span and quality of life.

Did you really just quote the bible? Furthermore, they talk about sprouted grains, not soy in the bible. I avoid soy as much as possible. There are just as many studies if not more that say that is bad for you that AREN'T funded by someone in the industry trying to make money. I'd rather err on the side of caution. I'm not so much worried about living less long, I'd rather just keep phytoestrogens and other substances from messing with my hormones in ways that I'm unsure of.

The point of the bible as I assume you don't believe in evolution as you do have emotions is that they never ate meat and lived healthier.

what!? you gotta be kidding me im sure they used hormones to get big tho, right? Is vanity a good thing according to the bible?

03-31-2009, 09:09 PM

purebred

Guest

folks, I've seen dj in action on other threads and his threads seem to get off-track quite easily. so to avoid this turning into a pissing match or a rollercoaster ride through name-calling, bashing and randomness, let's try something, if i may suggest an idea.

dj says soy protein is beneficial. so beneficial that it should be our primary--and he'd most likely argue the ONLY-- source of protein.

others disagree with him and state soy protein is actually detrimental and counterproductive to health, especially, if one interested in optimal physique gains (as I assume we all are).

All EXTREME points of views and personal vendettas or personal beliefs, feelings and beefs aside.

what does the valid scientific research conclude or suggest? (whichever of the two apply) can we please post studies and go from there and can we try our absolute hardest to make this a scientifically-based argument. let's leave religion and morality for another thread. if a member posts a study, your response should be either agreeing with the study and all that went into it or pointing out the flaws, therefore, strengthening or weakening one point of view or the other.

REMEMBER: we're talking about NON-GMO soy protein

now, is that too much to ask?
(if this topic has been hashed already, if someone could be so kind as to provide all us occasionally lazy folks with the link to that particular set of threads or thread? )

Isoflavones(found in soy) lower serum test levels and impairs erectile function(PMID 15735098, 17673432, 17905136). It can reduce male fertility(PMID 16731787). Feeding it to male children can possibly result in erectile dysfunction later in life(PMID 17673432). It can potentially induce gynecomastia(PMID 18558591). Mid-life tofu consumption has been associated with cognitive impairment and brain atrophy(PMID 10763906).

Yes, these studies mostly involve rats. No, they are not completely slam dunk. But this is just to emphasize that there is a lot of research out there with potential negative effects that might be enough reason for most males to steer clear of soy.

Isoflavones(found in soy) lower serum test levels and impairs erectile function(PMID 15735098, 17673432, 17905136). It can reduce male fertility(PMID 16731787). Feeding it to male children can possibly result in erectile dysfunction later in life(PMID 17673432). It can potentially induce gynecomastia(PMID 18558591). Mid-life tofu consumption has been associated with cognitive impairment and brain atrophy(PMID 10763906).

Yes, these studies mostly involve rats. No, they are not completely slam dunk. But this is just to emphasize that there is a lot of research out there with potential negative effects that might be enough reason for most males to steer clear of soy.

They have similar effects in women too but on the other end of the spectrum. They still mess up the reproductive system.

Did you really just quote the bible? Furthermore, they talk about sprouted grains, not soy in the bible. I avoid soy as much as possible. There are just as many studies if not more that say that is bad for you that AREN'T funded by someone in the industry trying to make money. I'd rather err on the side of caution. I'm not so much worried about living less long, I'd rather just keep phytoestrogens and other substances from messing with my hormones in ways that I'm unsure of.

anywho i don't avoid soy i simply don't supplement with it. its in almost everything even if its just small amounts, i.e bars.

when supplementing or your diet is primarily soy, ie tree hugging hippies, the types of soy you use and how those types are processed is whats important

03-31-2009, 11:16 PM

purebred

Guest

Originally Posted by wearedbleedblue

Pubmed is not working for me at the moment so I'll try to post some studies later.

looking forward to it, brother!

Originally Posted by Cinn

Yes, these studies mostly involve rats. No, they are not completely slam dunk. But this is just to emphasize that there is a lot of research out there with potential negative effects that might be enough reason for most males to steer clear of soy.

I'm hoping there are human studies as well, no?

Originally Posted by raginfcktard

when supplementing or your diet is primarily soy, ie tree hugging hippies, the types of soy you use and how those types are processed is whats important

^^^sorry bout that. i saw the bible quote and reply and had to say something...then i tried to follow up with something half way serious lol. non GMO it is...i'll read more of the posts next time!

03-31-2009, 11:28 PM

purebred

Guest

Originally Posted by raginfcktard

^^^sorry bout that. i saw the bible quote and reply and had to say something...then i tried to follow up with something half way serious lol. non GMO it is...i'll read more of the posts next time!

oh wow! i sincerely apologize. i didn't mean to come off reprimanding. my intention was to drive the point home that you are absolutely correct in mentioning the processing factors and such. for that particular reason, i stressed the importance of keeping things relevant and pertaining to non-GMO since there are a variety of factors that can affect the answer(s) to the question "is soy bad?"

it's essential we specify what KIND of soy and what "BAD" is. (which i made sure was done from the get-go )

i want to make sure you understand I give you thanks for your feedback and not reprimanding LOL. you did nothing wrong simple misinterpretation is all!

IF soy is so bad why was my test levels in the normal range when I was doing my 1-4 ad log. That means ether the 1-4ad was really strong and the soy balanced it out but I was low even before I started to consume soy.

I quote the bible because I believe in creation vs evolution. And your anger/tone is for sure something evolution would not have. Also known as emotions which is part of creation. Also I take it you believe in sex which is part of creation and not in evolution.

IF soy is so bad why was my test levels in the normal range when I was doing my 1-4 ad log. That means ether the 1-4ad was really strong and the soy balanced it out but I was low even before I started to consume soy.

With an uncontrolled N=1 study like that competing against tons of peer-reviewed literature, I am totally convinced!

Originally Posted by djbombsquad

I quote the bible because I believe in creation vs evolution. And your anger/tone is for sure something evolution would not have. Also known as emotions which is part of creation. Also I take it you believe in sex which is part of creation and not in evolution.

Isoflavones(found in soy) lower serum test levels and impairs erectile function(PMID 15735098, 17673432, 17905136). It can reduce male fertility(PMID 16731787). Feeding it to male children can possibly result in erectile dysfunction later in life(PMID 17673432). It can potentially induce gynecomastia(PMID 18558591). Mid-life tofu consumption has been associated with cognitive impairment and brain atrophy(PMID 10763906).

Yes, these studies mostly involve rats. No, they are not completely slam dunk. But this is just to emphasize that there is a lot of research out there with potential negative effects that might be enough reason for most males to steer clear of soy.

some studies show increase sperm quality, increased test production,increase SHBG (nessesary evil SOMETIMES) its the amount consumed, when consumed, and the ratios of the isoflavones, GENISTEIN alone can damage sperm but used with diadzin and eqoul i believe it showed positive effects.

the most damage soy does to us is when us guys are in the womb, the increase in SHBG binding to testosterone will effect the size of our tool when we are born. (gotta find that study again but tis out there)

some studies show increase sperm quality, increased test production,increase SHBG (nessesary evil SOMETIMES) its the amount consumed, when consumed, and the ratios of the isoflavones, GENISTEIN alone can damage sperm but used with diadzin and eqoul i believe it showed positive effects.

the most damage soy does to us is when us guys are in the womb, the increase in SHBG binding to testosterone will effect the size of our tool when we are born. (gotta find that study again but tis out there)

There's no point in making claims without citations. It's a waste of space.

04-01-2009, 01:29 PM

purebred

Guest

Originally Posted by djbombsquad

IF soy is so bad why was my test levels in the normal range when I was doing my 1-4 ad log. That means ether the 1-4ad was really strong and the soy balanced it out but I was low even before I started to consume soy.

I quote the bible because I believe in creation vs evolution. And your anger/tone is for sure something evolution would not have. Also known as emotions which is part of creation. Also I take it you believe in sex which is part of creation and not in evolution.

once again, dj, let's try and stay on point here and discuss the matter at hand: non-GMO soy: beneficial or detrimental to health? (refer to post #11 if you're still confused as to what this discussion actually entails)

circumstantial evidence (your 1-4 ad log) would be more beneficial to the discussion and supportive to your argument if you provided published studies. I've been over your activity on the boards and you constantly stress published studies and scientific research. now would be a good time to resort to those guns and begin pulling up studies backing your standing in the debate. please leave religion, politics and personal feelings/beliefs out of the thread.

frankly, and with all due respect, no one is interested in what a rabbi has to say unless it concerns the topic of this discussion. we don't need more controversy on this thread. what we need is some clarification and a bit of light shed on the non-GMO soy debate. again, please stay focused on the matter at hand. it seems I'm not going to be able to stress this enough

Originally Posted by crazyfool405

some studies show increase sperm quality, increased test production,increase SHBG (nessesary evil SOMETIMES) its the amount consumed, when consumed, and the ratios of the isoflavones, GENISTEIN alone can damage sperm but used with diadzin and eqoul i believe it showed positive effects.

the most damage soy does to us is when us guys are in the womb, the increase in SHBG binding to testosterone will effect the size of our tool when we are born. (gotta find that study again but tis out there)

it'd be fantastic if you can pull up all these studies! there seem to be studies whose results significantly contradict each other. for example, some suggest soy decreases test production (one of the main anti-soy arguments) while others (such as the one you mentioned) suggest they actually increase it! i wonder if the sources of funding and possibly the type of soy used may have something to do with the outcomes of these studies?

Originally Posted by Cinn

There's no point in making claims without citations. It's a waste of space.

to put it bluntly, yes (and no). lol not a complete waste but it would be much more effective and efficient to provide citations, folks!

once again, dj, let's try and stay on point here and discuss the matter at hand: non-GMO soy: beneficial or detrimental to health? (refer to post #11 if you're still confused as to what this discussion actually entails)

circumstantial evidence (your 1-4 ad log) would be more beneficial to the discussion and supportive to your argument if you provided published studies. I've been over your activity on the boards and you constantly stress published studies and scientific research. now would be a good time to resort to those guns and begin pulling up studies backing your standing in the debate. please leave religion, politics and personal feelings/beliefs out of the thread.

frankly, and with all due respect, no one is interested in what a rabbi has to say unless it concerns the topic of this discussion. we don't need more controversy on this thread. what we need is some clarification and a bit of light shed on the non-GMO soy debate. again, please stay focused on the matter at hand. it seems I'm not going to be able to stress this enough

it'd be fantastic if you can pull up all these studies! there seem to be studies whose results significantly contradict each other. for example, some suggest soy decreases test production (one of the main anti-soy arguments) while others (such as the one you mentioned) suggest they actually increase it! i wonder if the sources of funding and possibly the type of soy used may have something to do with the outcomes of these studies?

its actually specific isofglavones.. you have to remembver they they are phyto estrogens and act that way in certain tissue (ERa antagonist and ERb agonist/antagonist) i can pull up one or 2 studies, but im not pulling up anymore, because down the line ill be needing those because ill be investing time and money into it.

04-01-2009, 01:50 PM

purebred

Guest

Originally Posted by crazyfool405

i can pull up one or 2 studies, but im not pulling up anymore, because down the line ill be needing those because ill be investing time and money into it.

i'm definitely following this log as i've read a few studies stating that soy increases estrogen and then i've also seen studies showing no side effects. i agree with purebred that we don't need religion thrown in the mix on this subject as it has nothing to do with soy. I'd really like to know more on this subject as their are a few good tasting soy products.